Philip Cowley and Rosie Campbell examine the public's view of British politicians with and without children, as well as the behaviour of MPs in their communications with voters. They find a preference for candidates who are parents and no punishment effect for women politicians with children

Campbell, Rosie

Cowley, Philip

LSE Research Online

Parental	status	as	an	electoral	asset:	how	voters	viewpoliticians	with	and	without	childrenPhilip	Cowley	and	Rosie	Campbell	examine	the	public’s	view	of	British	politicianswith	and	without	children,	as	well	as	the	behaviour	of	MPs	in	their	communications	withvoters.	They	find	a	preference	for	candidates	who	are	parents	and	no	punishmenteffect	for	women	politicians	with	children.When	she	was	running	for	the	leadership	of	the	Conservative	Party	in	2016,	one	of	heropponents	argued	that	the	fact	Theresa	May	had	never	had	children	meant	she	lacked	a	‘stake	in	the	future’.Previously,	when	she	was	Home	Secretary,	it	was	reported	that	aides	to	the	then	Prime	Minister,	David	Cameron,were	critical	of	her	for	the	same	reason,	and	‘her	lack	of	family	makes	her	look	“obsessed”	by	politics’.During	the	2015	British	Labour	leadership	election,	one	Labour	MP	had	said	that	she	was	going	to	vote	for	YvetteCooper	because	as	‘a	working	mum,	she	understands	the	pressures	on	modern	family	life’,	comments	that	werewidely	seen	as	a	dig	at	one	of	the	rival	female	candidates	who	had	no	children.In	both	these	cases,	the	parental	status	of	the	various	male	candidates	for	the	leadership	of	their	parties	was	notconsidered	an	issue.The	Australian	Prime	Minister	Julia	Gillard	was	variously	described	by	some	of	her	opponents	as	‘deliberately	barren’and	‘an	unproductive	old	cow’	–	phraseology	that,	for	obvious	reasons,	would	never	be	ascribed	to	a	man	–	alongwith	the	claim	that	because	she	had	‘chosen	not	to	be	a	parent’,	she	was	‘very	much	a	one-dimensional	person’.	InNew	Zealand,	Jacinda	Arden	was	asked	about	whether	she	intended	to	have	children	within	hours	of	becomingleader	of	the	Labour	Party.Yet	despite	how	obviously	gendered	this	discussion	is	–	and	how	often	politicians	of	both	sexes	routinely	use	imagesof	themselves	in	domestic	family	settings	–	there	is	curiously	little	written	on	the	impact	that	politicians’	parentalstatus	may	have	on	how	they	are	viewed	by	the	electorate.	There	is	plenty	of	research	that	considers	the	impact	ofvoters’	parental	status	on	their	voting	behaviour	and	political	attitudes	but	much	less	that	tests	the	impact	ofpoliticians’	parental	status	on	vote	choice	and	political	attitudes.	Perhaps	voters	share	the	prejudices	of	some	ofthose	criticising	Theresa	May	or	Julia	Gillard	–	but	perhaps	they	do	not.In	a	recent	paper	published	in	the	British	Journal	of	Politics	and	International	Relations,	we	examined	both	howBritish	MPs	with	children	presented	themselves	–	and	how	voters	reacted.	For	the	former,	we	looked	at	British	MPs’websites.	Almost	all	British	MPs	now	have	their	own	website	and	almost	all	of	these	have	a	section	entitled	‘About’	or‘Biography’	or	similar,	in	which	the	MP	provides	information	about	themselves.	These	are	a	useful	resource,	under-utilised	by	researchers.	There	is	no	standard	format	to	this	material.	Subject	to	almost	no	constraints,	they	canchoose	what	to	reveal	and	what	to	omit.	These	websites	therefore	present	the	image	that	the	MP	wishes	to	project	tothe	voter.These	profiles	contain	–	or,	more	accurately,	since	we	collected	data	in	2014,	contained	–	frequent	reference	to	MPs’children,	such	as:	‘John	and	his	wife	Susan	live	in	his	Lincolnshire	constituency	and	have	two	young	sons’;	‘Heatherhas	lived	in	Bretby	for	the	last	22	years	with	her	husband	and	daughter’;	‘Elizabeth	is	married	with	two	daughters’;‘He	is	married	to	Michelle	and	is	the	proud	father	of	three	daughters’;	‘I	live	in	South	Devon	with	my	husband	Adrianand	we	have	3	children,	all	at	university’.Once	we	controlled	for	the	fact	that	women	MPs	are	less	likely	to	have	children,	we	found	the	majority	of	MPs	withchildren	mentioned	this	fact.	There	was	no	statistically	significant	difference	between	the	propensity	of	men	(67%)	orwomen	(62%)	to	do	so	–	although	we	did	find	a	difference	among	the	(very	small	number	of)	MPs	who	displayed	apicture	of	their	children	(of	women	MPs,	the	figure	was	1%,	of	men	it	was	8%).	We	also	found	inter-party	differences,with	Conservatives	more	likely	to	mention	their	children	(79%)	than	Labour	MPs	(55%).British Politics and Policy at LSE: Parental status as an electoral asset: how voters view politicians with and without children Page 1 of 2		Date originally posted: 2018-07-25Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/politicians-parental-status-impact/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/To	examine	the	public’s	reaction	to	politicians	depending	on	their	parental	status,	we	used	a	survey	experiment	inwhich	respondents	read	two	short	profiles	about	hypothetical	politicians,	and	then	decided	which	of	the	twopoliticians	they	preferred.	We	manipulated	the	biographical	information,	changing	both	the	sex	and	the	number	ofchildren	involved	for	both	candidates.	This	is	a	technique	we	have	used	in	other	research	on	candidates.	It	has	theadvantage	that	it	tests	respondents’	attitudes	without	it	being	obvious	what	it	is	that	is	being	tested.We	found	clear	evidence	that	voters	think	more	highly	of	politicians	with	children	when	compared	to	politicianswithout	children.	In	terms	of	overall	preference,	candidates	with	children	were	rated	seven	percentage	points	higherthan	those	without.	We	found	no	evidence	that	voters	reacted	negatively	to	women	politicians	with	children	but	wedid	find	some	evidence	that	women	without	children	were	less	attractive	when	compared	to	a	male	candidate	withchildren.	Whether	measuring	their	approachability,	their	experience,	their	effectiveness,	or	voters’	overall	preferencethe	result	for	a	male	candidate	with	children	versus	a	female	candidate	without	showed	a	statistically	significantadvantage	for	the	man.Our	research	shows	that	children	are	an	electoral	asset	–	and	it	would	appear	that	British	politicians	know	that.	Theboost	the	hypothetical	candidates	in	our	survey	received	was	not	massive,	but	neither	was	it	trivial	and	in	tight	racesit	may	make	a	difference.	Given	the	high	proportion	of	MPs	who	are	parents	who	make	reference	to	their	children	intheir	websites,	we	suspect	they	are	intuitively	aware	of	the	advantage	that	this	gives	them.____________Note:	the	above	draws	on	the	authors’	published	work	in	the	British	Journal	of	Politics	and	International	Relations.About	the	AuthorsPhilip	Cowley	is	Professor	of	Politics	in	the	School	of	Politics	and	International	Relations	at	QueenMary,	University	of	London.		Rosie	Campbell	is	Professor	of	Politics	in	the	Department	of	Politics	at	Birkbeck,	University	ofLondon.			All	articles	posted	on	this	blog	give	the	views	of	the	author(s),	and	not	the	position	of	LSE	British	Politics	and	Policy,nor	of	the	London	School	of	Economics	and	Political	Science.	Featured	image	credit:	Pixabay/Public	Domain.British Politics and Policy at LSE: Parental status as an electoral asset: how voters view politicians with and without children Page 2 of 2		Date originally posted: 2018-07-25Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/politicians-parental-status-impact/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/

Parental status as an electoral asset: how voters view politicians with and without children

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/91202/1/Cowley_Parental-status_Author.pdf

Parental status as an electoral asset: how voters view politicians with and without children

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online